From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Tom Rini Date: Fri, 17 Feb 2012 10:10:22 -0700 Subject: [U-Boot] [PATCH v2 3/6] cm-t35: add EEPROM module and pass Linux a serial number In-Reply-To: <4F3E22D4.6080409@aribaud.net> References: <4F031628.9070502@ti.com> <1325764937-7342-1-git-send-email-grinberg@compulab.co.il> <20120105145611.47A9082518@gemini.denx.de> <4F0AA59B.2080603@compulab.co.il> <4F305AA8.3040303@aribaud.net> <4F30DA4C.5010208@compulab.co.il> <4F3E22D4.6080409@aribaud.net> Message-ID: <4F3E89FE.7020702@ti.com> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: u-boot@lists.denx.de On 02/17/2012 02:50 AM, Albert ARIBAUD wrote: > Hi Igor, > > Le 07/02/2012 09:01, Igor Grinberg a ?crit : >> Hi Albert, >> >> On 02/07/12 00:56, Albert ARIBAUD wrote: >>> Le 09/01/2012 09:30, Nikita Kiryanov a ?crit : >>>> On 01/05/2012 04:56 PM, Wolfgang Denk wrote: >>>>> Dear Igor Grinberg, >>>>> >>>>> In message<1325764937-7342-1-git-send-email-grinberg@compulab.co.il> >>>>> you wrote: >>>>>> From: Nikita Kiryanov >>>>>> >>>>>> Add board specific EEPROM handling module, >>>>>> read the serial number from the EEPROM and pass it to Linux. >>>>> ... >>>>> >>>>>> * Fix strange linker warning: ".bss section overlaps previous >>>>>> sections" >>>>>> by changing the type of the eeprom_layout static global variable >>>>>> to int >>>>>> (probably this is a compiler bug). >>>>> Probably it is now. Did you inspect the linke rmap? >>>> >>>> u-boot.map shows the bss section aligning perfectly with the start of >>>> rel.dyn. >>>> >>>> The difference between the original "working" version and the version >>>> with the warning >>>> was an additional byte added by uchar eeprom_layout to the size of >>>> libcm_t35.o. >>>> This shouldn't be a problem because the bss section is followed by an >>>> ALIGN(4), but >>>> we decided to try changing eeprom_layout to an int and the problem went >>>> away. >>>> When we tried to define 4 uchars the problem reappeared. >>>> >>>> This suggests that this might be a compiler bug. >>>> >>>> There's been some discussion about this in the following threads: >>>> http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.comp.boot-loaders.u-boot/114646 >>>> http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.comp.boot-loaders.u-boot/90723 >>>> and we're not aware of any fix to the issue. >>> >>> Which prompted me to test --no-check-sections with CS 2009q1. >>> Adding it to LDFLAGS_u-boot does reduce the annoyance from errors to >>> a warning, >>> but there is no way to completely make it disappear. >> >> So the conclusion is still a tool chain bug, right? >> Probably it doesn't hurt besides the annoying warning. > > Sorry for being slow. > > Yes, it seems to be a toolchain bug and limited to a spurious warning. > However, spurious warnings are always a pain when doing a MAKEALL arm, > because the board is listed among the unclean and failed builds and then > one must go through these individually and remember that this specific > warning is both unimportant and unavoidable. Have we gone and bugged any toolchain folks about what caused / fixed this problem so that perhaps we can option around it or otherwise squash this? -- Tom